He also blamed the EU's rules on state aid having "prevented us from investing in broadband in a way that is best for the UK.
Er ... don't we keep giving large amounts of money to BT to get them to provide rural broardband?
UK Environment Secretary Michael Gove has promised to use the cash Blighty no longer has to give to the EU to subsidise rural connectivity. In a speech heavy on rhetoric but light on detail, Gove told delegates at the National Farmer's Union the government would spend billions of pounds improving rural broadband and 4G mobile …
> Er ... don't we keep giving large amounts of money to BT to get them to provide rural broardband?
Yes, we do, but it's not much, and the cash is running out. I guess all he's saying is that he'll put a little bit more money in the pot - I imagine his quote of "spending billions of pounds to improve rural broadband" will get diluted to "spending a few more million quid" in the long run.
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/11/government-extends-uk-2mbps-rural-better-broadband-subsidy-scheme.html
Yes, we do, but it's not much, and the cash is running out. I guess all he's saying is that he'll put a little bit more money in the pot
Well the BDUK money is running out, but the government has already committed £400m out of the TV licence fee monies to rural broadband infrastructure. So I expect more money to be found and for the existing £400m commitment to be re-announced as if it were new monies.
EU rules do not prevent things like improving rural broadband
Indeed, EU launched a strategy to improve rural broadband FFS!
IIRC UK won one of the best broadband project awards recently, and over teh years EU has injected plenty of cash into UK for improving rural broadband.
Even by MP standards of lies, this is plumbing new depths when it's so easy to prove Gove wrong just from memory without even needing to google for confirmation.
Disclaimer - I live in the sticks and have some farmers as neighbours so tend to find out quickly via word of mouth when cash gets pumped into local rural broadband & other infrastructure improvement schemes. One of the (quite new) mobile phone towers nearby even has a plaque mentioning EU funding help on it!
Also, what surplus? Wasn't every uk gov study coming out that brexit will cost extra money?
Yes yes but that's only until the resurgence of the British Empire They're preparing for it right now, there's some Polish guys down at Portsmouth recaulking the victory. BAE are doing mods; the masts are coming down and a couple of Yamaha outboards are being shoved on the back to make room for the F35s. Apparently there was a worry that the decks might be damaged by the engines, but they got a great deal on some cladding from an estate management company in Chelsea.
Thanks for pointing me towards https://ahdb.org.uk/brexit/default.aspx . Over a dozen reports, interesting though on the whole rather depressing reading.
https://ahdb.org.uk/documents/Horizon_Meat&Dairy_2018-01-31.pdf
"Approximately 11% of current UK beef exports are sent to non-EU markets" i.e. 89% goes to the EU
"The UK has access to very few of the largest beef-importing countries, such as Japan and the USA" Not sure Trump will give the UK better access in future.
"Non-EU sheep meat exports were only 4% of total sheep meat exports. [...] the UK struggles to
compete against cheaper low-cost producers from the Southern Hemisphere and South America"
So 96% goes to the EU (mostly France, I think) but, if WTO tariffs apply to UK exports, is likely to be replaced by cheaper lamb from New Zealand, etc.
Please point out any mistakes in my observations - this is rather beyond my ken.
the UK struggles to compete against cheaper low-cost producers from the Southern Hemisphere and South America"
Price is not the problem. UK not slaughtering the animals to the customer requirement IS the problem. UK lamb is stunned, then factory killed instead of it done properly with a knife while alive.
90% of sheep meet consumption is in Muslim countries - predominantly the middle east. If you want to sell there it has to be killed the HALAL way. By a human. With a knife. While conscious.
1. It is a manual process. There are not enough qualified Eastern European immigrants to do that and there will be even less after BrExit.
2. If UK will start slaughtering this amount of lamb to the customer requirements there will be civil war with the animal protesters at each and every slaughterhouse. Considering their numbers and how militant they are in the UK it is just not worth it.
He also blamed the EU's rules on state aid having "prevented us from investing in broadband in a way that is best for the UK.
Er ... don't we keep giving large amounts of money to BT to get them to provide rural broardband?
The TPTB at Westminster and in Whitehall thought they could simply throw money at BT before someone told them this would contravene the EU state-aid rules - that the UK largely wrote and got the EU to adopt. (Remember one of the problems UK exporters to the EEC encountered was governments favouring local businesses, so the UK got rules about state aid adopted to help level the Single Market playing field between in-country and out-of-country companies bidding for work.) And so they went away and came up with the funding rules for the BDUK Programme which effectively satisfied the state-aid criteria whilst making it only really viable for BT to tender...
As we know, a reason why the government wanted BT to be involved is down to the existing arrangements for the monitoring of communications.
Gove more closely resembles Gollum than Frodo. Or was that your intention?
I suspect so. He said "a quest about a Ring", not to a quest to save the Middle Earth. If he expected the latter, he needs to share what he is smoking. To imagine such an altruistic self-sacrifice from GoveNoccio... Such imagination would take some very cool drugs to fuel and not sharing them is a crime.
He doesn't look like a hobbit, he looks like Joe 90.
FWIW, Gove was born and raised in Scotland, but made his political career in the Tory heartlands of the South East of England. I won't say he "went native", because he likely fitted in better there in the first place.
Safe to say it's unlikely Tory Boy would have got as far as he did if it had been up to myself and most fellow Scots. The English were the ones who adopted the little twerp and facilitated his rise to power, they can keep the f****r.
Don't raid our dustbin for cast-offs then complain to us when they stink.
Wasn't this the speech where he promised farmers would still have access to EU labour? I guess he just "forgot" to note that the EU has already said that freedom of movement is non-negotiable.
I like the idea that because Tim Berners-Lee is a Brit, it follows somehow that the WWW was British, conveniently ignoring the fact that he was working for CERN at the time. You know, one of those hated multinational bodies.
Still, if people are prepared to believe that the magic money pot will allow them to spend the same money on the NHS, better transport, farm subsidies and now broadband, then pillocks like Gove will still continue to tell them.
"Wasn't this the speech where he promised farmers would still have access to EU labour? I guess he just "forgot" to note that the EU has already said that freedom of movement is non-negotiable."
I dont rate Gove and I will believe him when this project actually happens but why would the EU's stance on freedom of movement have diddly squat to do with our choosing to allow people to enter this country even from the EU to help on farms?
Assuming your neighbour bans your family from their house doesnt stop you from accepting their family into yours.
@codejunky:” ...but why would the EU's stance on freedom of movement have diddly squat to do with our choosing to allow people to enter this country even from the EU to help on farms?”
Pro-Brexit folk have this annoying habit of making their problems sound like the EU’s fault.
The EU didn’t kick anybody out; the UK electorate voted to leave.
Unemployment is on the rise again. I’ll laugh when Jobcentres send our homegrown unemployed out to pick mushrooms, clean toilets and do all the other jobs which were done by “foreigners”. Should be a wakeup call for some...
@ Snorlax
"Pro-Brexit folk have this annoying habit of making their problems sound like the EU’s fault."
Your comment seems to have nothing to do with Charlie claiming the EU stance on freedom of movement has any impact on an independent UK's choice to allow people into the UK. The EU cannot dictate free movement (well they are trying which is why negotiation didnt get very far for a while) but we can reject free movement and still choose who to let in and from where.
"Unemployment is on the rise again"
Yeah I spotted that Guardian moment. The amusement being that it is barely rising from an all time low. Comparisons against the EU where it is falling dramatically forgot that EU unemployment is actually high. Relative movement without actual position are pretty worthless. Just as stunning EU growth and slow UK growth forget that the UK is years ahead of the EU in economic recovery and the EU is so far behind that growth is still for catching themselves up. But honest reporting like that doesnt show a doomed UK and utopia EU.
"Pro-Brexit folk have this annoying habit of making their problems sound like the EU’s fault."
So returning to this, some remainers do have an annoying habit of ignoring fact to show the EU in a good light and the UK in a bad light.
@codejunky: There's a good little troll. There you go again - "the EU cannot dictate..." Yes they can, and they will. You seem to be under the illusion that the UK is in a position to bargain - it's not.
Speaking of employment, has Farage still got his snout in the EU trough?
Funny that a guy who despises the EU so much doesn't mind collecting an MEP's salary from Brussels every month...
@ Snorlax
"Yes they can, and they will. You seem to be under the illusion that the UK is in a position to bargain - it's not."
We are in the position to accept a deal or not. To think the only option is to accept a deal is to forget it cannot be forced without force. But this still has nothing to do with the original response to Charlie that if we are out of the EU we can accept people into this country on our terms regardless of the EU's opinion. Aka we dont need to block people from the EU coming here to do jobs we want done even if we dont subscribe to freedom of movement.
@ Charlie Clark
"Because it's part of the negotiations: if the UK wants vets, fruit pickers, nurses, doctors, plumbers, etc. it will have to give them the same rights to settle as they have under existing agreements"
Actually you are wrong. We dont have to. I am not arguing for or against anything on this just pointing out that you are very wrong. Lets assume hard brexit with no deal (hypothetical). We can still let people from the EU in on temp visas to pick fruit. We dont need permission from the EU to do that. It is a private individual and our countries border restrictions which make the deal, the EU is not involved.
I am hoping I read your comment right when you said- "Wasn't this the speech where he promised farmers would still have access to EU labour? I guess he just "forgot" to note that the EU has already said that freedom of movement is non-negotiable."
Even under hard brexit we actually will still have the ability to do that with no deal at all with the EU. I hoped you understood that and your comment was mistaken. Hence my reply.
"Still, if people are prepared to believe that the magic money pot will allow them to spend the same money on the NHS, better transport, farm subsidies and now broadband, then pillocks like Gove will still continue to tell them."
It is truly scary what some people believe about a magic money pot and I will only believe it when the pigs stop flying and the bacon lands on the table. Until then I take it as the usual political spouting off to hoodwink voters. And as I said I am no fan of Gove.
The amusement being that it is barely rising from an all time low.
Tell that to those who've been forced off the figures into low-paid, shit work. Unemployment is lower and so are wages.
the UK is years ahead of the EU in economic recovery
If you take the whole of the EU then you're talking shit, as usual. The non-UK part never contracted as much as the UK as 2008-2018 comparisons show. In some countries like Greece things got a lot worse, of course, a tragedy for those concerned but also a very Greek tragedy with land reform, ending restrictive practices, etc. continually being deferred. A big problem for all countries is poor wage growth.
@ Charlie Clark
"Tell that to those who've been forced off the figures into low-paid, shit work. Unemployment is lower and so are wages."
Why? I dont see you telling the people in the promised land of the EU that high unemployment figures is great for them to be in the bastion of light. Unemployment is lower, so are wages, and still doing better than the EU. My point still stands. Add to that the moves to normalise the economy (currency getting stronger) vs the EU who is still trying to devalue their currency as we did years ago to recover from the recession.
@ Pen-y-gors
"The EU's stance has no relevance. The problem is May's stance"
No kidding. That does bother me. Unfortunately she seems to be making statements resembling the racists and some of the remainers who want the UK to block itself off from the world if we leave the EU. I really hope its just rubbish being spouted.
"No foreigners is what 17.4 million people asked for."
When? Is this racists and complaining remainers? What about the leave voters? And whatever happened to the outward looking remainers? They do seem quiet but I do hope they are siding with the outward looking leave voters.
"After all, there must be <bold>some</bold> advantages to Brexit? Surely? No, go on, something, please? Just a little thing? Okay, no."
I guess you have missed the leave arguments? Democracy, trade, sovereignty, immigration, economy? If you are serious with the tail end of that then I can only guess you dont read many leave posts on the reg especially mine. I keep trying to get remainers to discuss this, but most dont seem to have any thoughts on that only EU good UK bad.
@ Snorlax
"The UK isn't seen by EU citizens as a welcoming place"
Just read some of these comments from remainers. Would you want to live in a country of people saying stuff like that? Or of course Gove and Boris popping up could be enough to put people off.
Shock news.
The UK is not part of the Shengen Agreement.
It always could put anyone going down the Green isle through the ringer if it chose to.
But y'know the UK Home Office didn't think that was cricket, and it would have needed more staff.
@JOhn SMith 19:"The UK is not part of the Shengen Agreement.
It always could put anyone going down the Green isle through the ringer if it chose to."
I guess they'll need to amend section 2(1) of the Republic of Ireland Act 1949 then?
It is hereby declared that, notwithstanding that the Republic of Ireland is not part of His Majesty’s dominions, the Republic of Ireland is not a foreign country for the purposes of any law in force in any part of the United Kingdom...
I don't think the Irish have similar legislation on their end, but I'm open to correction...
I’ll laugh when Jobcentres send our homegrown unemployed out to pick mushrooms, clean toilets and do all the other jobs which were done by “foreigners”.
So your argument against Brexit is that it will deprive British businesses of cheap foreign labour to exploit?
How refreshingly Capitalist of you.
So your argument against Brexit is that it will deprive British businesses of cheap foreign labour to exploit?
Your average lazy fat/borderline obeze slob propped on the bar at JD Weatherspoons will simply not make it through the day. He/She will drop in 3-4 h time. Tops.
I am saying this based on experience. I am old enough to be of the generation when the schools and universities in Eastern Europe had a one month draft every year to pick the crops. I have fallen off the f***ing tree from exhaustion (and funnily enough so has my wife) and still failed to make the quota. I know how hard is this job.
It is not a matter of of cheap - it is a matter of "you cannot make the lazy f***ers complaining about their jobs being taken do the job for any amount of money".
So your argument against Brexit is that it will deprive British businesses of cheap foreign labour to exploit?
Research tends to show that the immigrants are not displacing local workers so the wage level is not the main factor in most situations. Many of the employers will tell you that they cannot find local workers to do the work at any price. It could be lack of skills such as doctors or nurses but it could also be that people aren't prepared to do some of the back-breaking work that immigrants will do.
Low wages are driven more by the "Walmart effect" of low prices driving wages down. If we want milk to cost 50p a litre (or whatever it is) we either expect people to earn a pittance or be replaced by robots. Hint, post-Brexit expect more jobs to be done by machines.
I’ll laugh when Jobcentres send our homegrown unemployed out to pick mushrooms, clean toilets and do all the other jobs which were done by “foreigners”.??
Personally, I will be watching with interest to see whether THTB really have the backbone to do this. I will laugh when our homegrown unemployed complain about being made to do jobs that "Johnny foreigner" should be doing, whilst admitting they voted for Brexit...
"Johnny foreigner" should be doing, whilst admitting they voted for Brexit...
Indeed.
A British recruitment consultant of my acquaintance sent a mixed group of 8 people (some old, some young, some British, some foreign) to a 12 night shift at a bread factory.
At the 6 hr mark 1/2 of them (mostly the younger, fitter, lazier ones) had f**ked off home as it was "too hard."
The way he described them I suspected several of these idiots had voted to leave.
A nice demonstration of the Dunning Kruger effect in action, as they clearly believed they were far too good to do the job, despite no experience or qualifications to actually do anything better.
why would the EU's stance on freedom of movement
Because it's part of the negotiations: if the UK wants vets, fruit pickers, nurses, doctors, plumbers, etc. it will have to give them the same rights to settle as they have under existing agreements. Otherweise expect the EU to play even harder ball with things like reciprocal tax arrangements, including making it even less atrractive to work in the UK that it will be already. For example, it'd be easy enough to make such workers pay tax in the own country on anything they earn in the UK. Course, there are a couple of million in sub-saharen Africa jumping at the chance to work in cold, wet fields in the winter.
But you know this already: "regulatory alignment" means keeping things as they are (except the UK losing voting rights) but just keeping it out of the Mail and the Telegraph. There isn't really any time between now and January 2021, when you're out the door, to do any of these negotiations, let alone by the end of October, which is when a transitional agreement will have to be done by.
The fuckwits in the government running have added to the handicap by pissing off a lot of the more talented civil servants who Whitehall, who are the ones you need to get the details.
But who cares as long as Johnny Foreigner fucks off and Bojo drives the magic bus round the country with cash and G&Ts for everyone. Oh, happy days!
@Charlie Clark:"Because it's part of the negotiations: if the UK wants vets, fruit pickers, nurses, doctors, plumbers, etc. it will have to give them the same rights to settle as they have under existing agreements."
The thing is, a lot of these doctors, nurses, bus drivers and fruit pickers have already left and won't be coming back. Maybe we can expect a visa waiver arrangement with some non-EU countries to bring in cheap labour after Brexit? Unemployment in Turkey is somewhere around 10%; I wonder if many Turks would like to work in the UK, no questions asked?
The UK isn't seen by EU citizens as a welcoming place, and that's thanks to a vocal minority of arseholes who can't (or won't) do the jobs that they complain about the foreigners taking. Sad really...
The thing is, a lot of these doctors, nurses, bus drivers and fruit pickers have already left and won't be coming back.
They did not just leave. They took a lot of money with them and the remaining are sending an even bigger amount out in preparation to do the same.
These are the stats for average salary nationally in Bulgaria for last year: Average salary in Bulgaria by month and industry for 2017 in leva
Growth is > 12%. The only explanation is the financial injection from BrExit - all the money which instead of being spent here is now being spent there.
Romania, Poland, etc are all the same and similar numbers. >10, reaching 20-25 in some specific economic areas and regions.
Money DOES NOT grow on trees. The money spent there to induce this growth would have been spent in the UK otherwise. It was lost by the UK economy and gained by the Eastern European economies. The numbers needed for such a spurt across all of Eastern Europe are in the tens of billions and I find it difficult to believe that ANYTHING, even an act of god showering all of the UK with gold nuggets will be able to recoup it. We are definitely not talking about measly 300 million a week here. This is more.
@Voland's right hand:"These are the stats for average salary nationally in Bulgaria for last year: Average salary in Bulgaria by month and industry for 2017 in leva
Growth is > 12%. The only explanation is the financial injection from BrExit - all the money which instead of being spent here is now being spent there."
You might think so, but no. Bulgaria is receiving €10bn in EU aid up until 2020 according to the Financial Times. There's a lot of cheap credit there at the minute...I hope they look at Ireland, Greece, Spain etc and take note of their mistakes.
You might think so, but no. Bulgaria is receiving €10bn in EU aid up until 2020
It has been receiving them since times forgotten around the time it joined with minimal effect - have a look at the previous years stats - same website. 2016 is 4%, 2015 is 4%, previous years vary between 2 and 4%.
The >10% a year growth starts with BrExit or to be more exact the formulation of "BrExit means BrExit" and the actual declaration of article 50.
We can make some guesstimates on the size by comparing it to the EU Aid effect by the way. I'd rather not try to make guesses, as they are likely to be very unscientific. However, any way I look at it the numbers are likely to have Bn at the end.
I am too lazy to try to concoct similar queries in Romanian and Polish, but I would expect their national statistics to show similar numbers.
This is off topic - as far as the cheap credit, Bulgaria debt is one of the lowest in Europe - at ~25% of GDP since 2005. UK at 88% can only dream about a debt at this level. So it is not going down the Greek route any time soon. UK is more likely to go before that (especially considering how much money it is bleeding out at the moment).
@codejunky
but why would the EU's stance on freedom of movement have diddly squat to do with our choosing to allow people to enter this country even from the EU to help on farms?
The EU's stance has no relevance. The problem is May's stance.No foreigners. Remember that one of the major advantages of Brexit is meant to be that we can chuck out all these working foreigners who contribute so much to our economy. (We can already chuck out the non-working ones after three months without leaving the EU, but May just couldn't be arsed). No foreigners is what 17.4 million people asked for. It would be a tad silly to have a Brexit to expel the foreigners, and then let them all back in again. After all, there must be <bold>some</bold> advantages to Brexit? Surely? No, go on, something, please? Just a little thing? Okay, no.
@Phil O'Sophical:"Says the anonymous coward who can't actually produce a real fact-based rebuttal."
LOL, more comedy gold.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
Pretty much every post of yours on this subject is fact-free unsubstantiated nonsense.
"No foreigners is what 17.4 million people asked for."
Really? Did you personally ask each and every person who voted to leave why they voted that way?
Based just on the people I know, people voted leave for different reasons, ditto for those who voted remain. You can't generalise why people voted either way.
Really?
No, nobody really knows but lots of people pretent to know. This is why it was a stupid idea and should at least have been followed by some kind of consultation. Instead we get platitudes like "Brexit means Brexit" and "enemies of the people". Racism in more or less overt forms did, however, play a significant part of the campaign.
>Based just on the people I know, people voted leave for different reasons, ditto for those who voted remain. You can't generalise why people voted either way.
True, but of most of the people I know who voted Brexit did so because they don't like foreigners, followed closely by those who think we're governed by foreigners. Many of the latter group seem genuinely surprised when presented with facts to the contrary. The former just don't like brown people. On the other hand pretty much everyone I know who voted remain, including myself, did so because they knew that we will be worse off (billionaire media barons and other non-doms excluded) and are going to have no influence on things which will still affect us. The way things have developed have shown that it's going to be worse than expected.
For the record, I despise a hell of a lot of the EU, like the insistence on two parliaments, the fact that we pay for wastes of space like that scumbag Farage who do nothing other than buy themselves big houses and a hell of a lot of the policies, freedom of movement being one of them.
However, we've now thrown away the chance to fix it.
True, but of most of the people I know who voted Brexit did so because they don't like foreigners,
Maybe you need a better class of acquaintances?!
For the record, I despise a hell of a lot of the EU, like the insistence on two parliaments, the fact that we pay for wastes of space like that scumbag Farage ...
However, we've now thrown away the chance to fix it.
We've spent 25 years trying to fix it and achieved precisely zero. Time to throw it away and start again.
>>True, but of most of the people I know who voted Brexit did so because they don't like foreigners,
>Maybe you need a better class of acquaintances?!
You can be assured that I do not choose these people as acquaintances. They're colleagues or family. Some of them were born abroad and still have this view, as if it applies to others and not to them.
Some of them on the other hand have demonstrable levels of intelligence, generally dwarfed by levels of ignorance.
>We've spent 25 years trying to fix it and achieved precisely zero. Time to throw it away and start again.
Actually, no. No attempt has been made whatsoever. The treaty of Rome was signed in 1957, a time when war-ravaged Europe was in dire straits and under the threat of Russia. Half a century of unity held that at bay, along with extremists like yourself. We learned how to cooperate and not kick the shit out of each other. However, a lot of people live in cloud cuckoo land and don't realise or don't care that ideals don't always work in practice. Free movement is one of these: people flee disaster and flock towards opportunity. The situation over the last decade has seen those two align and hence the mass migration of people, some seeking shelter, others seeking opportunity.
It's not a great situation and should have been mitigated against, as the consequences should have been obvious. However, because of this, people have been blinded to the fact that this union has brought prosperity and that's why people have been attracted here. It beggars belief that people think that the solution is to make Britain shit again. By leaving the EU, we're not going back to the inception of the EU, because the EU will continue to exist, will continue to set the rules, and whether we like it or not, we'll still have to deal with them. Do you really think any other country is going to say here's the UK, those jumped up little shits hanging off the side of Europe who used to go round the world killing people, let's drop our trousers for them?
@codejunky
but why would the EU's stance on freedom of movement have diddly squat to do with our choosing to allow people to enter this country even from the EU to help on farms?
The EU's stance has no relevance. The problem is May's stance.No foreigners. Remember that one of the major advantages of Brexit is meant to be that we can chuck out all these working foreigners who contribute so much to our economy. (We can already chuck out the non-working ones after three months without leaving the EU, but May just couldn't be arsed). No foreigners is what 17.4 million people asked for. It would be a tad silly to have a Brexit to expel the foreigners, and then let them all back in again. After all, there must be some advantages to Brexit? Surely? No, go on, something, please? Just a little thing? Okay, no.
I guess he just "forgot" to note that the EU has already said that freedom of movement is non-negotiable.
Two outcomes :
1) We end up with some sort of arrangement that means things are much as they are now - free movement of people.
2) We don't have something like this - in which case WE decide who WE let in and under what terms (so we can easily set the rules to allow the required workers to come here), and the EU gets to decide who they let in and under what terms.
There's a similar situation with trade. The anti-brexit liars are saying that if we end up working under WTO rules then we'll put out own prices up through import duties. Not true, under WTO rules WE can choose what tariffs WE apply to imports, and that tariff can be zero - the main restriction is that we cannot set different rates for different sources. While in the EU, we get our prices inflated by import tariffs set by the EU and which we are not allowed to vary.
@Simon Hobson:"The anti-brexit liars are saying that if we end up working under WTO rules then we'll put out own prices up through import duties. Not true, under WTO rules WE can choose what tariffs WE apply to imports, and that tariff can be zero"
More Brexit bullshit. You know that tariffs can also be applied to exports from the EU, dont you?
Even if you decided there were no tariffs on imports the EU could still add something on their end. Under WTO rules you will not have a better deal than you do at the moment. It will be worse and everybody will pay more, not less, for goods coming in from Europe. The level of stupidity and delusion from Brexit supporters is amazing...
Under WTO rules you will not have a better deal than you do at the moment. It will be worse and everybody will pay more, not less, for goods coming in from Europe.
Do you have a clue about what the WTO is and how it works? It exists to make trade flow freely, and with the lowest tarifs and taxes possible. It isn't there to impose some sort of punitive rates on countries who can't agree, quite the opposite, it's there to ensure that in the absence of agreed rates the defaults are reasonable, often ZERO.
The level of stupidity and delusion from Brexit supporters is amazing...
But it pales before that of the remainers who are so besotted by their EU masters that they have no clue how the world outside the EU works.
It exists to make trade flow freely, and with the lowest tarifs and taxes possible.
It patently isn't because that would exclude all the many free trade agreements that do exist. The WTO is a low common deominator arrangement with reciprocity and non-exclusivity agreements. For example, Trump's proposed increases on steel and aluminium import tariffs must apply to all imports, not just those from China.
But the fact that the WTO has managed little or no progress over the last twenty years is what is driving the regional trade and service agreement.
But, facts, who needs them when you got unicorns?
Phil O'Sophical:@"Do you have a clue about what the WTO is and how it works?
Yeah, I do. Why don't you give me your take on it? I'd love to be educated by another Brexit troll...
At the moment, goods moving between EU states don't have tariffs or quotas applied.
Under WTO rules, the UK will need to agree with the EU what tariffs or quotas are applied to what goods. The current 10% tariff on cars and car parts from outside the EU, for example, would mean goodbye UK car industry.
Now I know that the Brexit dreamers think there will be no restrictions, but that's not going to happen because the UK would then have the best of both worlds - no tariffs or quotas, and no obligations to the EU.
I'll leave you with these thoughts to ponder:
http://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/no-deal-the-wto-option/
"Under a hard Brexit/“WTO rules” scenario, without mutual recognition agreements for product standards, it is unlikely that UK products could enter the EU without further checks at the border. Over time, if there is divergence between UK and EU standards, UK businesses would need to produce two different product lines – one for the UK and one for the EU – which would increase costs and reduce competitiveness."
"The impacts of non-tariff barriers would be larger for the service sector, which makes up 80% of the UK economy. Access to the single EU aviation market requires headquarters and majority shareholdings to be located within the EU so that it can have regulatory oversight on safety."
Brexit: denial, delusion, lies..
Gove is just a Murdoch meat puppet.
I thought Lady MacGove, aka Sarah Vine, worked for that bastion of Britishness, The Daily Mail? Hence, the idea that subsidies for large landowners like Paul Dacre are such a great way to preserve the countryside. Along with fox-hunting, grouse-shooting and land-clearances, of course!
I don't suppose, now there's soon to be no environmental case to answer for the car (Solar powered Telsas for all), we could spend some of that infrastructure money on roads?
The ones we have are 3rd world standard, and as we haven't built any for 50 years, we've completely exhausted their existing capacity.
M25 - planned in the 60's, built in the very early 70s.
M18 - built 1967 so 50+ years ago.
M60 - opened in 1960 as the M62, renumbering it doesn't make it new.
M6 - built in 1958 so 50+ years ago.
The key here, is we don't have any planned new motorways, so there won't be any before the M25s 50 year time horizon expires. Your defence amounts to 40+ years isn't 50 even though it will be. Well, erm, how many more people are here now than 50 years ago? 10 million more, and with many families now owning multiple cars. That's between 10 and say 20 million more vehicles with nothing new to drive on.
The point stands - we need more roads and we haven't built any new ones for as close as makes no difference 50 years.
M60 - opened in 1960 as the M62
That'll come as a shock to the Scousers and Tykes who still use the M62 to between Liverpool and West Yorkshire. It was the M63 that got turned into the Manchester ring road but this did involve a lot of work just for the project as the M63 was initially tiddly.
>M25 - planned in the 60's, built in the very early 70s.
Err no, whilst construction of a few small sections started in 1973, most it was built in the early 1980's and then widened in the late 1990's.
>The point stands - we need more roads
That is debatable, particularly as the main areas where we need more roads is within our urban areas...
However, that also makes assumptions about what forms of transport we will be using, its affordability etc.
The M1-A1 link road doesn't count as a new motorway. It's an extension road to join existing road networks to create capacity by reducing demand on the M18. No different to widneing the M18 then. Widening existing motorways doesn't count as building new motorways. We've always widened or extended the ones we had AND built new ones at the same time.
We have 1/3rd of the motorway capacity of France.... We're going to have to put this anti-car nonsense behind us and start building the capacity we need, or our whole economy is finished.
>It was the M63 that got turned into the Manchester ring road but this did involve a lot of work just for the project as the M63 was initially tiddly.
The M63 did become part of the M60, but so did the southern end of the M66 as well as part of the M62 (the bit between the two sections of what is now the M62)
>The M1-A1 link road doesn't count as a new motorway. It's an extension road to join existing road networks to create capacity by reducing demand on the M18. No different to widneing the
M18 then.
What are you on about? Are you suggesting that before this road was built, the preferred route from West Yorkshire to the North was down the M1 to Doncaster, then up the M18 and A1(M)?
There have been loads of motorways built in that part of the country. The A1(M) now allows you to go all the way to the North East from the Channel Tunnel or from Exeter entirely on Motorway. Or up to Perth for that matter.
As for France, the UK, (i.e. including Northern Ireland) is a bit over 2/5 of the area of France (actually 0.44) and less than a third of the length of motorways (0.294) However, French motorways are often built to a much lower standard than ours - sharper bends, narrow hard shoulders and steeper inclines.
It's also a lot more spread out. We've got vast expanses on land which would be easy to acquire for motorways, but they tend to be in places where nobody lives. Those types of areas in France tend to be between big population centres.
They also have an entirely different funding model. The M6 toll is short and there's a viable alternative in the M6. The M4 bridges are a captive market but in France the alternative is usually the old routes nationales which take several times as long.
The other problem we have is most motorways in this country have one lane for traveling in as the inside and middle lanes are full of lorries.
>Actually the last bit of the M1 was built about 10 years ago, extending it north of Leeds to the A1,
></nitpick>
Actually, that stretch opened in 1999, making it just short of 20 years old. One of my old managers was one of the first civilians to drive on the new stretch - he was driving back into Leeds when they were removing the cones and he took the detour. I left that job in January 2000.
"The M1 may have started in 1959, but the last bit wasn't built until 1972."
FYI, the newest stretch is the Leeds East extension to the M1, opened in 1999.
And for the OP, I am, almost daily, driving through the A1 roadworks south of Scotch Corner where the dual carriageway is still being upgraded to 6 lane motorway. The A1/A1(M) in the North has been massively improved and upgraded over the last 20 or so years, significant stretches upgraded to 6 lane motorway and all those roundabouts through South Yorkshire and beyond are are now long gone. I'm not sure if they still have roundabouts further down like Biggleswade and Peterborough though. I've not been that way in a while
Infrastructure as an economic booster does not work any more. The various treaties regarding procurement killed it. Depending on the "grade" of BrExit, Britain may have to comply with some of the Eu rules as well.
The end result from these is that:
1. Infrastructural projects can be won by foreign companies so you actually subsidize Spanish Economy instead of UK. Spanish construction conglomerates have a ridiculous amount of spare capacity as a result of the real estate collapse there and have been winning a disproportional amount of business around the Eu. A good example are Bulgaria and Romania where they have won key Eu sponsored infrastructure projects like the second Danube birdge as well as large chunks of the motorway construction.
2. Even if the infrastructure is won locally, we no longer live in the days of FDR and Hitler when it was unemployed with shovels and pick-axes building them. It is professional, industrialized construction. Very little from it trickles back into the normal economy so the effect is only a fraction of what the textbooks say it will be.
"1. Infrastructural projects can be won by foreign companies so you actually subsidize Spanish Economy instead of UK."
Not sure, but I think that normally when a foreign-based company wins a tender for an infrastructure project they subcontract most of the work locally. Though they might bring in some managers, engineers and specialist plant. Similarly, concrete, tarmac, etc. will be sourced locally, only specialist items will come from overseas (and might still have if a local contractor won the job). Yes, they will be repatriating some profit, but in construction and civil engineering margins are exceedingly low, so that's not v relevant. (I'm not a tender or construction expert, but occasionally work with folk who are.)
"My betting is that this will not happen and the sticklanders will find that no money at all is available for their infrastructure for a number of years."
We already know that for certain. The UK has big financial obligations for shared projects and pension scheme that we are signed up that don't end on Brexit day. That's what the £billions "divorce settlement" is about. That's a good few years of payments that eat up pretty much all of the £350m per week.
@ John Brown (no body)
"The UK has big financial obligations for shared projects and pension scheme that we are signed up that don't end on Brexit day. That's what the £billions "divorce settlement" is about"
The good news is the condition attached to that money by this government that it will only be paid on the condition of the EU making an acceptable trade deal. So the previous deadlock was overcome as the EU doesnt want to swallow all the costs of brexit.
Of course that doesnt stop the gov accepting a bad deal but the other two alternatives is the EU is entitled to nothing or we get a trade deal with the EU.
>That's a good few years of payments that eat up pretty much all of the £350m per week.
Well in the world of Brexit campaigning where figures are used out of context; "Brexit to cost £2,000m a week, says Government's own report". It must be true, I saw it on the side of a red bus; so to save sending the EU £350m a week, we will instead cost the UK economy £2,000m a week - bargain!
How many groups have been promised the mythical "£350million a day" now?
Anyway, if we're going to get investment in rural infrastructure, it might be good to NOT chuck it into the BT money-pit. Projects such as https://b4rn.org.uk/ have achieved amazing results at a fraction of the cost!
This has *absolutely nothing whatsoever* to do with EU policy. It's blatant opportunism by a Minister to blame the EU on poor rural broadband that has been entirely in the gift of the UK government i.e. him and his buddies, to solve for years.
There are tons of EU funded programmes, notably cap, but also lots of cohesion funds going into UK regions and rural areas, that will have to be replaced by money from the UK exchequer anyway. A lot of what you put into the EU actually comes back anyway in terms of regional funding.
Then there's all the added costs on the economy of increased export/import costs to access market i.e. possible tariffs and unnecessary bureaucracy and then if £ takes a hammering (which is likely when/if no deal is struck) then the cost of rural broadband equipment and onward connectivity will go way up in relative terms, reducing bang for buck big time as none of is likely to be built in the UK (and even if it were it would be using foreign technology and components).
At this stage, sure why not blame the EU for bad weather. It's utterly bonkers!
"A lot of what you put into the EU actually comes back anyway in terms of regional funding."
Ah, that's another nail in the EU coffin then.
They want it to go to London instead.
After all, a shiny new footbridge across the Thames is sooo much more important than investing in regional libraries.
Just for the record, us Londoners would also like to have the money spent on proper things like libraries. Or how about the police, which they keep cutting back, as if we have no need for them any more.
The problem with the current government is they have no concept of money other than they don't want to give any of theirs away.
"Comparing parts of Kenya to Kent is a completely irrelevant comparison."
Not least of which, is building out their mobile infrastructure is, for much of the country, the first comms infrastructure it's ever had. There's no expensive landline system to maintain and expand in parallel or compete with.
So the BREXITeers have discovered the mythical pot that would automagically lead us to prosperity, happiness, peace and love for all.
Strange. I seem to remember that the morning after the referendum the 350m/week claim was promptly denied and shortly after that all political leaders resigned their party positions.
When are you going to realize that you've been had?
Science icon as it seems to require an extraordinary mind to just remember the facts
Not only are our political overlords mostly clueless about Brexit, they seem to revel in remaining clueless, unwilling to admit to or learn about the myriad complexities involved in detaching the UK from the EU. The mainstream media (msm) is no better, unwilling or unable to admit that the complexities exist. Therefore Gove, and others, can spout any old rubbish (here we have Gove blaming the EU for not allowing the UK to fund rural broadband / 4G and commentators above have correctly called this out as bullshit), with impunity. There will be more. Unless the msm puts some modicum of effort into calling out the bullshit and logical absurdities, the gung-ho cliff-edge Brexiteers will drive the UK over the cliff.
We do forget, however, that the reason we are in this situation has nothing to do with the UK’s relationship with its European neighbours; it is all about the Conservative and Unionist party remaining in power. The slow-motion car-crash of Brexit will only conclude when the Conservative and Unionist party decides to start sorting out its internal differences over its view of the UK’s place in the world. Don’t hold your breath though, asphyxia is unpleasant.
The cliff you should be worried about is the one the EU is headed for, the one with all the "warning: unemployment" signs on the edge, and the pile of smashed Greek and Italian Euros at the bottom.
it is all about the Conservative and Unionist party remaining in power.
Hmm, so why weren't they voted out of power & replaced by an anti-Brexit party last year, then?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." as Upton Sinclair put it.
Still sounds as accurate today as the day it was first said.
"How will it benefit the country that farmers can get 10mbs download speed? I only get 1mbps and I live in a city centre and that's enough for Netflix, gaming etc. Don't we subsidise them enough?"
That would be Netflix in sub standard definition, I assume. I found it just about usable when we had a 3mbps connection.